While i agree with much of what you say as an underlying factor it does not speak specifically to the disparity.

Why despite those same factors and concerns across many States and Provinces do we see a very clear disparity in vax rates in what are more conservative and more religious populations?

The gap in hospitalization rates speaks to a bigger disparity than is addressed by what you are saying.

To an extent. Of the 5% that do not get vaccinated - you seriously think its split between democrats and republicans?


Nah, that's just you using the blame black people approach. The demographic data you like to use does not break it up by political party, but if it did you would see the vast majority of white people are Trumpderps and/or Republicans, and those numbers greatly outnumber any other demographic.

The amusing thing is that you are using the same type of messaging that the anti-vaxxers used when they said it was a hoax and then just a flu and then that it was overblown and then that the vaccine did nothing. Every time their messaging failed because the virus did not care, so unvaccinated derps got hit harder, because of course they would. Pretty simple in the end - the vaccine prevents most deaths and serious illness and vaccine hesitancy is much greater on the alt-right side of the political spectrum. Hell, Trump got booed when he mentioned getting the vaccine, and he would be booed every time he says that at a rally. Think that ever happens at a Democratic rally?

I get that you really want it to not be the way it is, as that has been the approach of anti-vaxxers this whole time, but I predicted many months ago that the vaccine would crush the derps, and that prediction was as hard to make as predicting the result of a sports match that already finished. How hard you want to do to pretend reality is different is up to you, and you will find no shortage of people looking to monetize you by telling you what you want to believe, because they know how easy a mark people like you are in general. Your choice to stay like that or not, no real difference to me.

All the best.

https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/the...ination-rates/


https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covi...tor-dashboard/


I'm not disputing that ^. I get it; we've seen that partisan spread in one guise or another throughout the epidemic. I'm saying what's behind that is essentially the same for both groups, i.e., a lower risk assessment to themselves as opposed to a willingness to forgo the risk for some ideological end like freedom. Point (mine anyway) being that if everyone suddenly became convinced that there is zero risk with the vaccine and a high risk for contracting a severe case, essentially everyone is getting vaccinated.

If you ever go to an anti-vaxx rally you will quickly see that even if the virus was fatal for 50% of them and the vaccine was literally zero risk that the bulk of them would still refuse the vaccine. You are naive if you think everyone would get vaccinated, even in an extreme scenario like that.

If your point is that the more risk something is the less people will do it - well, I guess "duh" is the appropriate reply, but that by itself is kind of a meaningless point. Its like saying when people get older they have more life experience.

Harris: Alabama Recorded More Deaths Than Births in 2020

"At a news conference Friday in Montgomery, Alabama State Health Officer Dr. Scott Harris says the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a startling statistic: Alabama recorded more deaths in 2020 than births.

Harris believes that is the first time in state history that’s ever happened. He says it could happen again in 2021. He says the state is literally shrinking.

Harris says preliminary numbers show Alabama had 64,714 deaths last year, compared to 57,641 births. He says yearly statistics go back to the early 1900s.

In the U.S., 1 of 500 people have died of COVID-19, which Harris says is a “staggering number.” There have been more than 670,000 deaths. He says the U.S. has less than 5% of the world’s population, but accounts for more than 15% of deaths."

There is so much ******ation on both sides itt

I think you are missing the biggest difference.

Because of where people get their information they are being given different realities.

In one reality (Trump at his news conferences allegedly representing the CDC, Fox news, OANN, any other right wing outlets & social media propaganda) people are being told that Covid is either a hoax or only deadly for the very elderly, that it is similar to the Flu, and that it is up to each individual to decide whether to protect themselves or not. And there is a mixed representation of the safety and efficacy of vaccines where drugs like Hydorchloroquin and Ivermectin are cures and much better than vaccines.

In the other reality (CNN, MSNBC, TV Networks not Fox, CDC, scientific studies, etc.) , people are being told that this is a pandemic that spreads a lot faster than the Flu, is much deadlier than the Flu except for younger people, and that the vaccines are incredibly effective at reducing death and are safe.

But the biggest difference in the "political" portrayal is that people advocating masks and vaccines, social distancing, contact tracing, government mandates, and interventions when the local infection rates spike, are not doing it to protect themselves. They are advocating and doing it to protect others.

For those in the first reality, "Freedom" is about having the choice about whether to vaccinate, mask, socially distance as if it is about their own lives. But the other reality of Covid which took the CDC months to ascertain and following multiple mistakes, is that it is highly transmissible through the air. That masks do reduce transmission significantly (studies show from 50% to 70% when used by all indoors). That those vaccinated are protected from death for the most part (except for those with compromised immunity) but not from catching Covid and transmitting it to others with strong viral loads that can easily cause death among the unvaccinated.

Up until now both realities were dealing with mass hospitalizations - as in changing the Covid rules when things got bad.

But now one reality is letting people choose between their own vaccine and masking options and as a result hospital overruns are causing deaths for people, even who don't have Covid, needing emergency care and unable to get it. Without fully explaining the costs, risks and benefits. This reality exists in Red States in the US run by Governors who refuse to protect their constituents because they seem to be more interested in their own political prospects in primaries than the lives of their constituents. Who are ironically mostly in their own political sphere and reality.

The clock is ticking on one reality. Had President Trump joined the other reality and masked up he would easily have been re-elected President. But that wasn't going to happen when the US had less than 5% of the world's population and 20% of the Covid deaths up until the elections. In Florida the current 7 day average for deaths is almost 3 times what it was at the worst point of the pandemic pre-vaccines. And is worse than the national average. At the current rate Florida will exceed NY in per capita deaths from Covid within a month. That is unthinkable. NY had no chance to avoid the first wave of the pandemic. FL has had every chance to avoid this third wave.

I don't know much about Alberta but it seems that it is likely similar to Florida. Lower vaccine rates. Living in the wrong reality.

Good post but add in the Muh Freedums derps seem to also have a very deliberate 'f*ck everyone else' type attitude built in.

As you say one side is trying to 'protect others' with measures.

The Muh Freedum derps want to identify any place and anywhere the vulnerable may want to congregate to avoid contact with the Derps and their choice and that is exactly then the place the Derps want to force themselves in to while saying 'stay home if you don't like the risk I pose'.

Lots of similarities back to when battles raged to put some limitations on smokers who were used to smoking everywhere (hospitals, movie theaters, airplanes, etc) and the more militant smokers would light up near anyone they could tell was irritated by smoke. They always had one answer for the non smokers back then and it was 'stay home if you don't like my smoke'.

It took you three months to craft this post?

Not everyone has the patience to wait 13 years to make one of their few posts really count.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...13&postcount=8

though to be fair he did not start out great...

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...&postcount=119

I was basically 10 years between posts.

I created this account back in 2010 to ask a question about live Poker games in vegas and got my answer and never posted again.

I got a happy birthday message from the forum in April 2020 and that prompted me to think about Poker during Covid's first wave and I was curious how bad Vegas was doing so I came back and posted.

The rest, as they say is lucky history for the rest of you as this time I stuck around.

But they're "doing it to protect others" because they don't attach much if any risk to getting vaccinated. Look at the "Getting the vaccine is a bigger risk...." spread between the 'vaccinated' and the 'definitely not' crowd:

Except for younger people especially young men.

For healthy non-obese people younger than say 30 there is no need to take the vaccine for themselves. Its all about protecting older family members and their community at large.

I'd only quibble with this part. The vaccines do protect against catching COVID-19. Yes, they're great at preventing death, hospitalization, and symptomatic infection, but they also have efficacy against any infection, which also plays a role in reducing the overall spread.

I am not sure why having Covid is not considered to be valid on a vaccine mandate?

Good Video from Breaking Point

I used to like these two when first introduced to them but have lost all interest.

The entirety of the first minute he says is all garbage.

He is pretending as if at the start of the pandemic they Scientists were speaking definitively as if they have proven studies and facts when that was not the case.

When a pandemic like this presents and rapid reactions are needed, best guesses are involved and that is ok.

whether it is a new strain of cold, flu or Covid both airborne and contact spread will be on the table including in degrees.

It is a tactic of the far right (derp right) to act as if every later learning in science that changes a prior guess or opinion is proof that these scientists have no credibility. They create a situation where the scientists need to guess correct from the beginning or shut up because any change later proves them not trustworthy.

In fact the opposite is true. It is because science will adapt as new data comes and not claim they were right regardless (ala Trump) that you can and should trust science and the scientists.


So sadly I stopped this video at the 1 minute mark. Too much dishonesty in its beginnings. But I understand if you want the Derp crowd to tune it too you have to feed them some red meat.

No I was talking about the fact that as you say trust the science which I agree 100% and he keeps saying get vaccinated. The point is the science says that someone who has covid is more protected than someone that has the vaccine. Yes we do not know how long that immunity is good for but we also have no clue how long the vaccine is good for.
My question is why cant a vaccine mandate/passport apply as well to those that have had Covid? Its part of your medical record that you tested positive.

could be:

False.

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/co...us-vaccination

If you got Covid, you should still get the vaccine.

I've seen soooooo many people claim that natural immunity is at least as good as, if not better than, the vaccine in terms of preventing future infections. I assume this is false, because of the massive overlap between people making this claim and anti-vax truthers who have made many untrue statements in the past, but I have no actual information to back this up.

Are there other sources of information about this topic than nebraskamed.com? Not that that's necessarily a bad source or anything, but I Googled around a bit and found it tricky.

Vaccine is targeting via spike protein. VERY effective

Natural infection produces multiple antibodies.... not just spike.

Breakthrough infection rate 2.6%

Reinfection rate 0.31%

Almost 9 times more likely with vaccine vs natural immunity

This is true, but I want to add that the key to this being the most effective is that the spike protein is the key to infection and is thus going to be resistant to mutation (many potential mutations will result in a non-infectious virus). If you've gotten an infection, your body sheds it by any means that works. So, if it manages to produce antibodies for a more mutation-prone protein, that'll cure you, which is good, but there's less protection for the next strain that comes around. Having more antibodies to more proteins sounds like a good thing, and for some people it might be, but at the same time, there is a very good reason why the spike protein was chosen for these vaccines, and that's also why they're showing continued efficacy in the face of new strains. Your immune system doesn't have the ability to single out the most effective antibody target, but scientists did that for you.

Not remotely comparable populations.

I agree the science is thin in this area.

But based on early data like this ...
I can understand why they want to cut that risk in half if that data holds up.